Dutch Court Rules Apple May Not Use 'Remanufactured' iPads for Warranty Replacements

[MacRumors]

A new ruling by a judge in the Subdistrict Court of Amsterdam has mandated that Apple can not replace a broken iPad unit with a "remanufactured" device, and must supply the plaintiff with an entirely new iPad instead. The case stems from a woman who purchased an iPad Air 2 with AppleCare back in 2015, and subsequently faced problems with the device's Wi-Fi around four months later.

Apple then supplied the woman with a remanufactured version of the iPad, which Apple said is a process by which the company reconstitutes damaged products by using "the same production and inspection procedures" as it does for brand new devices. The woman disagreed with Apple's methods of replacing her iPad and took the company to court, with Tweakers [Google Translate] reporting that she "was not satisfied" with the remanufactured device she was given under AppleCare.

The Dutch judge has now ruled in agreement with the plaintiff, stating that a remanufactured version of the iPad is not enough. The judge said that the purchase state of the original iPad is what should be looked at when considering replacement devices, meaning an iPad purchased as remanufactured could be replaced with a remanufactured iPad, although it's unclear how -- or if -- purchasing a remanufactured iPad is even possible.

But an iPad purchased brand new -- as is the case here -- should be replaced with a new iPad. The Amsterdam court goes into more detail in a briefing posted online recently, translated from Dutch:

If a plaintiff had purchased a refurbished or replacement iPad, Apple may replace it with a refurbished or replacement copy, but if the consumer, as in this case, purchased a new iPad, she is entitled to a new iPad as a replacement."

A similar case passed through the Dutch courts last summer, wherein another Dutch woman sued Apple for refusing to replace her broken iPhone 6 Plus with a brand new model. The victory nullified the purchase agreement that the woman made with Apple, and ordered the company to refund the woman the full EUR799 that she paid for the iPhone. In short order, that case set a precedent for the future of similar cases in the country, placing a stain on "refurbished" devices sold by Apple, leading the company to use "remanufactured" ones instead.

Although the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, refurbished refers to the redistribution of used products to consumers at a slightly reduced cost, after they first go through a process that ensures their quality is ready for the market. Remanufacturing is generally a more rigorous and expensive process for companies to go through -- which is one of Apple's arguments in the Dutch case -- as it requires a level of specifications to be met that are as high-standard as they were for the original product.

The argument hasn't worked for Apple, and the judge has now ruled that Apple has to pay the woman in question EUR100 for every day that she was left without the new replacement iPad.

Article Link: Dutch Court Rules Apple May Not Use 'Remanufactured' iPads for Warranty Replacements

 

[SoN1NjA]

In come the "I've had replacements better than brand new" comments (not saying they aren't better, but we've all seen the comment a thousand times)

Wonder how Apple will respond to this, this obviously requires more money to replace a device, will they change prices or? And I wonder if Apple has to ship the iPad unit brand new or a full retail one with box and all

 

[err404]

I hope this doesn't become standard practice. Quality refurbishing is fine and helps minimize e-waste.
I would be surprised if she could even detect a refurb vs a new device without being told.

 

[jayducharme]

Actually, I'd prefer a remanufactured device. It's gone through additional inspections and conceivably could have fewer problems than a new device.

 

[richardsonrs]

I agree with this. I didn't buy a refurb device. I bought a new device and it didn't work properly, it should be replaced with a new device.

 

[keysofanxiety]

I imagine they'll also rule the same for, oh I don't know, every other OEM? A Samsung device, or an HP laptop: no refurb parts, or remanufactured parts, or refurb/remanufactured devices, and it has to be brand-new? Reckon that ruling will extend to all others?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

The argument hasn't worked for Apple, and the judge has now ruled that Apple has to pay the woman in question EUR100 for every day that she was left without the new replacement iPad.

Now this is absolutely ludicrous. The cost for that would easily exceed the price of a new iPad in the first place. What kind of toilet brush judge was ruling this? Did the claimant have emotional distress for the duration of their working-fine-but-it's-not-brand-new-so-therefore-I'm-dissatisfied device?

Unbelievable.

 

[Logic368]

unfortunately, I think Apple brought upon itself these issues. The last time I went to get an iPhone switched out, I got four DOAs right in the store! One wouldn't turn on, another had a scratch, another had a home button that wouldn't click, and another had a loose casing. Not sure why it's so hard to refurbish the models to good levels. And they kept telling me it was new! My god, if all of those were new, I might never buy an apple product again! Although when I got my new MacBook Pro, some of the keys wouldn't register or they would double register, and my AirPods had strong interference issues. Thankfully both problems resolved themselves with use, but I can't believe apple released a $2000 computer with such a crummy keyboard! And AirPods that have more interference than $80 Bluetooth headphones!

 

[err404]

I agree with this. I didn't buy a refurb device. I bought a new device and it didn't work properly, it should be replaced with a new device.

What is going on in your head that enables you to look at two subjectively identical devices that only differ in the box which they were shipped and judge one as inferior because parts in it may have been around the block in the past.
I would understand your point if we were taking about a store return that was shrink wrapped and stuck back on the shelf, but that is not what Apple is doing.

 

[WmSommerville]

I imagine they'll also rule the same for, oh I don't know, every other OEM? A Samsung device, or an HP laptop: no refurb parts or no refurb devices allowed and it has to be brand-new? Reckon that ruling will extend to all others?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

Um, yeah actually. That's how this usually works. The ruling almost certainly sets a precedent for other devices. And probably not just phones and tablets, but consumer goods in general.

In fact, there's a good chance that's where the reasoning for the ruling came from. Like, somewhere in Dutch legal history someone tried to pass off a used washing machine as a warranty replacement and 'boom' a judge has to now apply that reasoning to Apple.

 

[keysofanxiety]

Um, yeah actually. That's how this usually works. The ruling almost certainly sets a precedent for other devices. And probably not just phones and tablets, but consumer goods in general.

In fact, there's a good chance that's where the reasoning for the ruling came from. Like, somewhere in Dutch legal history someone tried to pass off a used washing machine as a warranty replacement and 'boom' a judge has to now apply that reasoning to Apple.

I hope you're right and it's not one rule for one and another rule for another. Depends how petulant the consumer is to actually take it to court in the first place, I guess.

I'm sure time will tell.

 

[H2SO4]

I imagine they'll also rule the same for, oh I don't know, every other OEM? A Samsung device, or an HP laptop: no refurb parts or no refurb devices allowed and it has to be brand-new? Reckon that ruling will extend to all others?

Yeah, I didn't think so.



Now this is absolutely ludicrous. The cost for that would easily exceed the price of a new iPad in the first place. What kind of toilet brush judge was ruling this? Did the claimant have emotional distress for the duration of their working-fine-but-it's-not-brand-new-so-therefore-I'm-dissatisfied device?

Unbelievable.

She bought a new device, not a remanufactured one. Apple are getting a slap because they took the piss. Let it go.
If the remanufactured ones are as good as new, (or better than that according to some), then why don’t Apple sell remanufactured devices alongside new ones in the shop? In fact the 'better than new thoroughly tested second hand ones' could even have a longer warranty as they’ve been tested more rigorously?

Strangely I wonder how Apple would react if Samsung told Timmy that he was to get remanufactured screens intermixed with new ones.

 

[PlainviewX]

I don't care what the give me, but it should have the full length warranty along with it. If I have two years left on it, I want the tensing two years on the replacement.

 

[dannyyankou]

She's better off with a "remanufactured" iPad. They go through more throrough testing than new devices.

 

[OnoYouDidnt]

I agree with this. I didn't buy a refurb device. I bought a new device and it didn't work properly, it should be replaced with a new device.

Apple has the best quality of device replacement in the industry. Responsible recycling trying to lower e-waste. This ruling I'd understand if it was a Samsung Frankenstein-Phone replacement (Poor Testing, horrible quality), but Apple is trying to take the word new out of people's vocabulary. Even "new" devices like the iPhone SE are made of responsibly recycled components and materials of other phones. This perspective is huge (e) waste, and I hope you re-think it.

 

[Goatllama]

If the remanufactured ones are as good as new, (or better than that according to some), then why don’t Apple sell remanufactured devices alongside new ones in the shop?

Don't know if they have them in the store, but they do sell 'em online: https://www.apple.com/shop/browse/home/specialdeals

 

[csurfr]

Seems easy enough for Apple to deal with this. No more replacements in store. You bring them the iPad they ship if out for repair. Nothing says they *have* to replace it, right? AppleCare states "replace or repair".

So much for your convenience.

 

[blasto2236]

I don't care what the give me, but it should have the full length warranty along with it. If I have two years left on it, I want the tensing two years on the replacement.

That's exactly how it works. You get 90 days or the remainder of your original warranty, whichever is greater. AppleCare transfers as well.

 

[talmy]

This is actually bad news for consumers because it will unnecessarily drive up prices of new goods. Unless the iPad was DOA, it was a used product when it went in for repair, and expecting a brand new replacement is unrealistic.

The inability to make repairs down at the individual component level is what led manufactures to have replacement, refurbished sub assemblies or entire replacement units. I first started seeing refurbished subassemblies in the 1960's. Prior to that circuits were simpler, there were more qualified repair technicians, and labor costs were relatively lower, and repairs were made at the component level. Nobody with a 1950's TV set going in for repair would get back a new TV, it would be 99% their old one and 1% the replacement part.

 

[KALLT]

Now this is absolutely ludicrous. The cost for that would easily exceed the price of a new iPad in the first place. What kind of toilet brush judge was ruling this? Did the claimant have emotional distress for the duration of their working-fine-but-it's-not-brand-new-so-therefore-I'm-dissatisfied device?

Unbelievable.

It is just there to put pressure on the defender to comply with the judgment quickly. If this would not be there, the defender could delay the enforcement for much longer without any significant repercussions, regardless whether they choose to appeal or not. For now, the pursuer gets a new iPad, the rest is sorted out afterwards.

 

[H2SO4]

Don't know if they have them in the store, but they do sell 'em online: https://www.apple.com/shop/browse/home/specialdeals

Yes of course, but they’re not the same price. If they were just as good people would be happy to pay for that surely?

 

[jimothyGator]

Many years ago, a truck I owned was in an accident. Some parts—I don't remember which ones—needed to be replaced, and the insurance company rep said they'd be replaced with used parts. I said, wait, why used parts? And she responded, the parts before the accident were also used.

I didn't like that answer at the time, but she was right: They were used parts. They were used by me. That I bought the truck new was immaterial. The truck, and its parts, were no longer new. They're used.

Some do-good insurance commission, legislator, or judge somewhere might order that insurers pay for all new parts, and some people might cheer this "pro-consumer" measure. But now, at least, I realize that nothing comes without a cost, and such a policy would mean more expensive insurance, additional waste, and little real gain.

The same is true if Apple and other electronics makes can't replace a used device with a used device: warranty costs will go up, at least some of those costs will be passed on to Dutch customers, and more waste will be created. There is no free lunch.

To quote another economist: there are no solutions. Only tradeoffs.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

Cool! Holland will have the highest priced iPads!

 

[richardsonrs]

What is going on in your head that enables you to look at two subjectively identical devices that only differ in the box which they were shipped and judge one as inferior because parts in it may have been around the block in the past.
I would understand your point if we were taking about a store return that was shrink wrapped and stuck back on the shelf, but that is not what Apple is doing.

Refurbs are often boomerangs. Working in retail electronics for years, I know this to be true. I'd rather take my chances with a new one from the factory like I originally paid for. They could easily solve this by offering a gift card or something similar for people who consent to taking a refurb instead of a new device.

I have also gone in and had to get get two different "new" iPhones because the one they selected first stopped working within days. No thanks.

 

[0007776]

Well I hope Apple dumps the extra ewaste in Holland instead of exporting it to someone else's backyard.

 

[Fzang]

Strangely I wonder how Apple would react if Samsung told Timmy that he was to get remanufactured screens intermixed with new ones.

He would let the customers play the screen lottery, most likely.

 

[icehockey77]

I agree with this. I didn't buy a refurb device. I bought a new device and it didn't work properly, it should be replaced with a new device.

Was the device brand new when you took it in for replacement? Would you prefer that all parts from broken devices, including working parts, are thrown out and only new devices and parts are utilized for all repairs and replacements?

A remanufactured or refurbished device goes through the same testing, sometimes with more scrutiny, than the new devices.